In 2021, a mentally ill woman was shot and killed by a state trooper after she fired a shotgun at him. Recently, a Delaware judge rejected the request to dismiss the lawsuit related to her death.
According to Raymond Rooks, his 51-year-old sister Kelly Rooks was shot by state police using excessive force. He argues that this action violated her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the federal Rehabilitation Act.
During a hearing held earlier this year, Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Picollelli Jr. contended that there was no intention of discrimination against Rooks by the police and that the lawsuit did not assert any mistreatment pattern or practice by troopers towards individuals with disabilities. He further argued that the police agency and its senior officials cannot be held accountable for the actions of the officers involved in the shooting. Additionally, Picollelli Jr. asserted that the police are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for any actions taken in their official capacities.
Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Clark observed in his ruling that, while assessing a motion to dismiss, it is imperative for the court to acknowledge the factual claims in a lawsuit as authentic and interpret all logical conclusions in favor of the plaintiff. Furthermore, he emphasized that the assertion made in a state court can withstand a motion to dismiss if it is considered “reasonably conceivable,” which is a less stringent criterion than the “plausibility” standard of pleading in federal court.
Trooper Dean Johnson is being accused of using excessive force in shooting Rooks in a lawsuit. The lawsuit further alleges that two other troopers present at the scene failed to intervene and prevent the shooting. Additionally, the complaint seeks to hold Delaware State Police accountable, along with its executive staff, for the officers’ actions, due to the police agency’s failure to adequately train officers on handling emotionally disturbed individuals.
Clark rejected all claims except for the failure-to-intervene claim against Cpl. Brandon Yencer. Although the claim against Trooper Jermaine Cannon was deemed “not plausible,” it is still “conceivable” and will not be dismissed, according to Clark’s ruling.
During a March hearing, attorney Patrick Gallagher argued that the troopers were aware of Raymond Rooks’ mental instability, as they had interacted with her several times prior to the shooting. Gallagher further claimed that instead of attempting to calm the situation, the troopers arrived at the scene with hostility and aggression.
He stated that the call was not intended for the police, but rather for medical assistance.
The complaint states that Rooks had bipolar disorder and that the higher dosage of lithium she was prescribed just before the incident made her feel even more depressed, anxious, and paranoid.
According to a report from the state attorney general’s office, Johnson’s use of deadly force against Rooks was deemed justified. The report states that Rooks had raised a shotgun towards Johnson and fired after asking, “Which one of you pigs wants to die tonight?” Based on the evidence presented, Johnson had a reasonable fear for his life and the lives of others, leading him to shoot Rooks in self-defense.